Case Details

Citation(s)
2014 SLG 2314 2014 SLD 2314 (2014) 364 ITR 625

WRIT PETITION No. 25229 OF 2000, APRIL 10, 2014
G. CHANDRAIAH AND CHALLA KODANDA RAM, JJ
J.V. Prasad for the Petitioner. Smt. Kiranmayi and A.V. Krishna Koundinya for the
Respondent.

Commissioner of INCOME TAX, Vijayawada

v.

Settlement Commission (IT & WT)

Law:

Section:

JUDGMENT Challa Kodanda Ram, J. - The writ petition is filed by the petitioners questioning the order dated February 25, 2000, passed by the Settlement Commission (IT & WT), Additional Bench, Chennai/first respondent in S. A. No. 520/VIJ/40/99/IT, whereby the first respondent admitted the application filed by the second respondent for the purpose of considering the same under Chapter XIX-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"). 2. The affidavit sworn by Suprakash Lahiri, S/o. S. S. Lahiri, Commissioner of Income-tax, Vijayawada, filed into the court on December 18, 2000, and the same came to be admitted on December 19, 2000. While admitting the writ petition, this court granted interim suspension as prayed for in W.P.M.P. No. 32185 of 2000 on the same day. The order impugned was challenged on the following grounds: (a) The report of the first petitioner and the written submissions filed on behalf of the Revenue were not adverted to. (b) The statements given by the assessee-second respondent during the search was voluntary. (c) The concealment has already been detected by the Department and to determine the undisclosed income, no complex investigation is required. (d) The assessee-second respondent can raise all his objections at the time of assessments before the Assessing Officer, when a notice under section 143(2) of the Act is issued. (e) The assessee-second respondent did not discharge the statutory liability of disclosing the income fully and truly. The entertainment of application would jeopardise the interests of the Revenue as there is a possibility of the assessment yielding huge undisclosed income. 3. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the second respondent denying the allegations made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and stated that on December 19, 2000, by the time, the writ petition came to be admitted and interim order came to be passed, final orders were passed by the Settlement Commission on November 20, 2000, under section 245D(4) of the Act and in that view of the matter, the very writ petition itself had become infructuous. It was further averred that after considering the report filed by the first…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492